CompaRNA - on-line benchmarks of RNA structure prediction methods
Home

Methods
Datasets
Rankings
RNA 2D Atlas

Help
FAQ

Contact us
RSS feeds
Twitter

Table of contents:

  1. Overview

  2. Performance Plots

  3. Performance of PPfold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for PPfold(seed) & RNASLOpt [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric PPfold(seed) RNASLOpt
MCC 0.735 > 0.489
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.762 ± 0.075 > 0.480 ± 0.086
Sensitivity 0.691 > 0.475
Positive Predictive Value 0.783 > 0.505
Total TP 1194 > 821
Total TN 916973 > 916873
Total FP 467 < 891
Total FP CONTRA 48 < 177
Total FP INCONS 283 < 627
Total FP COMP 136 > 87
Total FN 535 < 908
P-value 4.98172311752e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PPfold(seed) and RNASLOpt. Positive Predictive Value (PPV) is plotted against sensitivity. Each dot represents a single test of each method. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for PPfold(seed) and RNASLOpt).

  2. Average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCC) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were plotted for different RNA families, for which at least 3 members were present in the benchmarking dataset. 'n' denotes the number of MCCs used to calculate the average and CI. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for PPfold(seed) and RNASLOpt).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PPfold(seed) and RNASLOpt. The whiskers correspond to 95% confidence intervals (CIs). 'n' denotes the number of MCCs used to calculate average MCCs and CIs. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for PPfold(seed) and RNASLOpt).

^top





Performance of PPfold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for PPfold(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1194
Total TN 916973
Total FP 467
Total FP CONTRA 48
Total FP INCONS 283
Total FP COMP 136
Total FN 535
Total Scores
MCC 0.735
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.762 ± 0.075
Sensitivity 0.691
Positive Predictive Value 0.783
Nr of predictions 22

^top



2. Individual counts for PPfold(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00626 0.94 0.89 1.00 77 56539 1 0 0 1 10
RFA_00627 0.95 0.91 1.00 79 56874 4 0 0 4 8
RFA_00628 0.95 0.91 1.00 78 57213 2 0 0 2 8
RFA_00630 0.91 0.85 0.97 74 56877 5 0 2 3 13
RFA_00814 0.94 0.88 1.00 36 25164 2 0 0 2 5
RFA_00816 0.95 0.90 1.00 37 23183 2 0 0 2 4
RFA_00817 0.95 0.90 1.00 37 21908 1 0 0 1 4
RFA_00818 0.94 0.88 1.00 36 20265 2 0 0 2 5
RFA_00819 0.95 0.90 1.00 37 27929 2 0 0 2 4
SRP_00079 0.74 0.69 0.79 61 41828 28 0 16 12 27
SRP_00099 0.60 0.59 0.62 56 44760 40 2 32 6 39
SRP_00124 0.71 0.66 0.76 56 37054 27 3 15 9 29
SRP_00182 0.85 0.78 0.92 79 45970 17 0 7 10 22
SRP_00241 0.53 0.52 0.54 43 45977 49 9 27 13 39
SRP_00252 0.64 0.63 0.64 56 49054 42 5 26 11 33
SRP_00253 0.64 0.62 0.66 56 49370 40 5 24 11 34
SRP_00257 0.51 0.44 0.59 48 50959 36 5 28 3 60
SRP_00260 0.56 0.51 0.61 51 47811 39 5 28 6 49
SRP_00328 0.61 0.56 0.67 48 39549 29 5 19 5 37
SRP_00329 0.72 0.67 0.78 57 39830 26 2 14 10 28
SRP_00331 0.63 0.59 0.69 51 37601 31 2 21 8 36
SRP_00340 0.54 0.50 0.59 41 41258 42 5 24 13 41

^top



Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 821
Total TN 916873
Total FP 891
Total FP CONTRA 177
Total FP INCONS 627
Total FP COMP 87
Total FN 908
Total Scores
MCC 0.489
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.480 ± 0.086
Sensitivity 0.475
Positive Predictive Value 0.505
Nr of predictions 22

^top



2. Individual counts for RNASLOpt [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00626 0.68 0.64 0.72 56 56538 30 6 16 8 31
RFA_00627 0.61 0.60 0.62 52 56869 41 11 21 9 35
RFA_00628 0.89 0.84 0.95 72 57215 15 0 4 11 14
RFA_00630 0.69 0.67 0.72 58 56872 32 5 18 9 29
RFA_00814 0.51 0.51 0.51 21 25159 29 9 11 9 20
RFA_00816 0.58 0.63 0.53 26 23171 26 13 10 3 15
RFA_00817 0.24 0.27 0.22 11 21896 42 12 26 4 30
RFA_00818 0.21 0.22 0.21 9 20258 39 14 20 5 32
RFA_00819 0.60 0.68 0.53 28 27913 34 16 9 9 13
SRP_00079 0.62 0.57 0.68 50 41832 24 3 20 1 38
SRP_00099 0.43 0.41 0.44 39 44762 49 7 42 0 56
SRP_00124 0.39 0.36 0.43 31 37056 41 8 33 0 54
SRP_00182 0.54 0.51 0.57 52 45965 39 11 28 0 49
SRP_00241 0.26 0.27 0.26 22 45970 66 14 50 2 60
SRP_00252 0.44 0.42 0.46 37 49061 48 6 37 5 52
SRP_00253 0.23 0.22 0.23 20 49369 69 9 57 3 70
SRP_00257 0.56 0.52 0.61 56 50948 37 1 35 1 52
SRP_00260 0.69 0.66 0.72 66 47803 28 8 18 2 34
SRP_00328 0.60 0.60 0.61 51 39537 36 7 26 3 34
SRP_00329 0.34 0.32 0.36 27 39829 50 4 43 3 58
SRP_00331 0.15 0.13 0.17 11 37612 52 1 51 0 76
SRP_00340 0.30 0.32 0.29 26 41238 64 12 52 0 56

^top


Matthews Correlation Coeffient, Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Value have been calculated based on the paper by Gardener & Giegerich, 2004.